SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
The proceedings of the Second Computational Aeroacoustics (CAA) Workshop on Benchmark Problems held at Florida State University are the subject of this report. For this workshop, problems arising in typical industrial applications of CAA were chosen. Comparisons between numerical solutions and exact solutions are presented where possible.
Accurate numerical non-reflecting boundary conditions are important in all the proposed benchmark problems of the Second Workshop. Recently, a new absorbing boundary condition has been developed using Perfectly Matched Layer (PML) equations for the Euler equations. In this approach, a region with a width of a few grid points is introduced adjacent to the non-reflecting boundaries. In the added region, Perfectly Matched Layer equations are constructed and applied so that the out-going waves are absorbed inside the layer with little reflection to the interior domain. It will be demonstrated in the present paper that the proposed absorbing boundary condition is quite general and versatile, applicable to radiation boundaries as well as inflow and outflow boundaries. It is also easy to implement. The emphasis of the paper will be on the application of the PML absorbing boundary condition to problems in Categories 1, 2, and 3. In Category 1, solutions of problems 1 and 2 are presented. Both problems are solved using a multi-domain polar grid system. Perfectly Matched Layer equations for a circular boundary are constructed and their effectiveness assessed. In Category 2, solutions of problem 2 are presented. Here, in addition to the radiation boundary conditions at the far field in the axisymmetric coordinate system, the inflow boundary condition at the duct inlet is also dealt with using the proposed Perfectly Match Layer equations. At the inlet, a PML domain is introduced in which the incident duct mode is simulated while the waves reflected from the open end of the duct are absorbed at the same time. In Category 3, solutions of all three problems are presented. Again, the PML absorbing boundary condition is used at the inflow boundary so that the incoming vorticity wave is simulated while the outgoing acoustic waves are absorbed with very little numerical reflection. All the problems are solved using central difference schemes for spatial discretizations and the optimized Low-Dissipation and Low-Dispersion Runge-Kutta scheme for the time integration. Issues of numerical accuracy and efficiency are also addressed.
Category 1, Problems 1 and 2, Category 2, Problem 2, and Category 3, Problem 2 are solved computationally using the Dispersion-Relation-Preserving (DRP) scheme. All these problems are governed by the linearized Euler equations. The resolution requirements of the DRP scheme for maintaining low numerical dispersion and dissipation as well as accurate wave speeds in solving the linearized Euler equations are now well understood. As long as 8 or more mesh points per wavelength is employed in the numerical computation, high quality results are assured. For the first three categories of benchmark problems, therefore, the real challenge is to develop high quality numerical boundary conditions. For Category 1, Problems 1 and 2, it is the curved wall boundary conditions. For Category 2, Problem 2, it is the internal radiation boundary conditions inside the duct. For Category 3, Problem 2, they are the inflow and outflow boundary conditions upstream and downstream of the blade row. These are the foci of the present investigation. Special nonhomogeneous radiation boundary conditions that generate the incoming disturbances and at the same time allow the outgoing reflected or scattered acoustic disturbances to leave the computation domain without significant reflection are developed. Numerical results based on these boundary conditions are provided.
This report describes the formulation of a model of the dynamic behavior of the Benchmark Active Controls Technology (BACT) wind tunnel model for active control design and analysis applications. The model is formed by combining the equations of motion for the BACT wind tunnel model with actuator models and a model of wind tunnel turbulence. The primary focus of this report is the development of the equations of motion from first principles by using Lagrange's equations and the principle of virtual work. A numerical form of the model is generated by making use of parameters obtained from both experiment and analysis. Comparisons between experimental and analytical data obtained from the numerical model show excellent agreement and suggest that simple coefficient-based aerodynamics are sufficient to accurately characterize the aeroelastic response of the BACT wind tunnel model. The equations of motion developed herein have been used to aid in the design and analysis of a number of flutter suppression controllers that have been successfully implemented.
This report describes the development of transfer function models for the trailing-edge and upper and lower spoiler actuators of the Benchmark Active Control Technology (BACT) wind tunnel model for application to control system analysis and design. A simple nonlinear least-squares parameter estimation approach is applied to determine transfer function parameters from frequency response data. Unconstrained quasi-Newton minimization of weighted frequency response error was employed to estimate the transfer function parameters. An analysis of the behavior of the actuators over time to assess the effects of wear and aerodynamic load by using the transfer function models is also presented. The frequency responses indicate consistent actuator behavior throughout the wind tunnel test and only slight degradation in effectiveness due to aerodynamic hinge loading. The resulting actuator models have been used in design, analysis, and simulation of controllers for the BACT to successfully suppress flutter over a wide range of conditions.
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis results are compared with benchmark quality test data from the Propulsion Engineering Research Center's (PERC) Rocket Based Combined Cycle (RBCC) experiments to verify fluid dynamic code and application procedures. RBCC engine flowpath development will rely on CFD applications to capture the multi-dimensional fluid dynamic interactions and to quantify their effect on the RBCC system performance. Therefore, the accuracy of these CFD codes must be determined through detailed comparisons with test data. The PERC experiments build upon the well-known 1968 rocket-ejector experiments of Odegaard and Stroup by employing advanced optical and laser based diagnostics to evaluate mixing and secondary combustion. The Finite Difference Navier Stokes (FDNS) code was used to model the fluid dynamics of the PERC RBCC ejector mode configuration. Analyses were performed for both Diffusion and Afterburning (DAB) and Simultaneous Mixing and Combustion (SMC) test conditions. Results from both the 2D and the 3D models are presented.
This report results from a benchmarking study undertaken by NASA as part of its planning for the possible creation of new science Institutes. Candidate Institutes under consideration cover a range of scientific and technological activities ranging from biomedical to astrophysical research and from the global hydrological cycle to microgravity material science. Should NASA create these Institutes, the intent will be to preserve and strengthen key science and technology activities now being performed by Government employees at NASA Field Centers. Because the success of these projected non-Government-operated Institutes is vital for the continued development of space science and applications, NASA has sought to identify the best practices of successful existing scientific and technological research institutions as they carry out those processes that will be most important for the new science Institutes. While many individuals and organizations may be interested in our findings, the primary use of this report will be to formulate plas for establishing the new science Institutes. As a result, the report is organized to that the "best practices" of the finest institutes are associated with characteristics of all institutes. These characteristics or "attributes" serve as the headings for the main body of this report.
A number of Java features make it an attractive but a debatable choice for High Performance Computing. We have implemented benchmarks working on single structured grid BT,SP,LU and FT in Java. The performance and scalability of the Java code shows that a significant improvement in Java compiler technology and in Java thread implementation are necessary for Java to compete with Fortran in HPC applications.
As the new ccNUMA architecture became popular in recent years, parallel programming with compiler directives on these machines has evolved to accommodate new needs. In this study, we examine the effectiveness of OpenMP directives for parallelizing the NAS Parallel Benchmarks. Implementation details will be discussed and performance will be compared with the MPI implementation. We have demonstrated that OpenMP can achieve very good results for parallelization on a shared memory system, but effective use of memory and cache is very important.
The Benchmark Active Controls Technology (BACT) wing test (see chapter 8E) provides data for the validation of aerodynamic, aeroelastic, and active aeroelastic control simulation codes. These data provide a rich database for development and validation of computational aeroelastic and aeroservoelastic methods. In this vein, high-level viscous CFD analyses of the BACT wing have been performed for a subset of the test conditions available in the dataset. The computations presented in this section investigate the aerodynamic characteristics of the rigid clean wing configuration as well as simulations of the wing with a static and oscillating aileron and spoiler deflection. Two computational aeroelasticity codes extensively used at NASA Langley Research Center are implemented in this simulation. They are the ENS3DAE and CFL3DAE computational aeroelasticity programs. Both of these methods solve the three-dimensional compressible Navier-Stokes equations for both rigid and flexible vehicles, but they use significantly different approaches to the solution 6f the aerodynamic equations of motion. Detailed descriptions of both methods are presented in the following section.
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis results are compared with benchmark quality test data from the Propulsion Engineering Research Center's (PERC) Rocket Based Combined Cycle (RBCC) experiments to verify fluid dynamic code and application procedures. RBCC engine flowpath development will rely on CFD applications to capture the multi -dimensional fluid dynamic interactions and to quantify their effect on the RBCC system performance. Therefore, the accuracy of these CFD codes must be determined through detailed comparisons with test data. The PERC experiments build upon the well-known 1968 rocket-ejector experiments of Odegaard and Stroup by employing advanced optical and laser based diagnostics to evaluate mixing and secondary combustion. The Finite Difference Navier Stokes (FDNS) code [2] was used to model the fluid dynamics of the PERC RBCC ejector mode configuration. Analyses were performed for the Diffusion and Afterburning (DAB) test conditions at the 200-psia thruster operation point, Results with and without downstream fuel injection are presented.
Recently, a Cray T3D Emulator has been made available on the Cray Y-MP and C90 computers. The Pittsburgh Supercomputer Center has acquired a CRAY T3D system and many other centers like Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) will have it by the end of 1994. The Cray T3D system is the firstphase system in Cray Research, Inc.'s (CRI) three-phase massively parallel processing (MPP) program. This system features a heterogeneous architecture that closely couples DEC's ALPHA microprocessors and CRI's parallel-vector technology, i.e. the Cray Y-MP and Cray C90. The Cray T3D Emulator will give prospective users a valuable experience in developing high performance applications on the MPP system. This emulator runs programs written in CRI's MPP Fortran programming model (data sharing and work sharing) or Parallel Virtual Machine (PVM) programming model. It will help the users to study data layout, data locality, and data reference patterns thereby providing feedback which will enable one to write more efficient parallel codes. An overview of the Cray T3D hardware, software, and three of its available programming models is presented.The Cray Fortran Programming Model comprising (a) Data Sharing, (b) Worksharing and (c) Message Passing, will be discussed with examples. We have also implemented distributed BLAS 3 (matrix-matrix multiplication) in data parallel model (using only CSHIFT); worksharing model using block distribution and collapsed distribution; and message passing model using PVM. We have also implemented 2D and 3D FFTs for radix-2 using PVM. The performance of NAS Parallel 'Benchmarks (NPB) on CRAY T3D will be compared with other highly parallel systems such as CM-5, Paragon, C90 etc.
This talk will describe the NAS (National Aerospace Standards) Parallel Benchmarks, which are now widely cited in the high performance computing field as a measure of sustained performance on realistic scientific applications. The latest performance results will be included. It will be shown that significant progress has been made by several systems during the past year or so, with sustained performance on a par with the best conventional systems, and with performance per dollar significantly exceeding the conventional systems. This talk will also describe many of the pitfalls of performance reporting, and will give advice on how to avoid such pitfalls. The overall state of the field of high performance computing will also be discussed.
What is a "good" visualization? How can the quality of a visualization be measured? How can one tell whether one visualization is "better" than another? I claim that the true quality of a visualization can only be measured in the context of a particular purpose. The same image generated from the same data may be excellent for one purpose and abysmal for another. A good measure of visualization quality will correspond to the performance of users in accomplishing the intended purpose, so the "gold standard" is user testing. As a user of visualization software (or at least a consultant to such users) I don't expect visualization software to have been tested in this way for every possible use. In fact, scientific visualization (as distinct from more "production oriented" uses of visualization) will continually encounter new data, new questions and new purposes; user testing can never keep up. User need software they can trust, and advice on appropriate visualizations of particular purposes. Considering the following four processes, and their impact on visualization trustworthiness, reveals important work needed to create worthwhile metrics and benchmarks for visualization. These four processes are (1) complete system testing (user-in-loop), (2) software testing, (3) software design and (4) information dissemination. Additional information is contained in the original extended abstract.
This viewgraph presentation includes a brief history of benchmarking computational grids at NASA Ames, measuring grid performance and preliminary results of recent studies.
We describe the design of a new method for the measurement of the performance of modern computer systems when solving scientific problems featuring irregular, dynamic memory accesses. The method involves the solution of a stylized heat transfer problem on an unstructured, adaptive grid. A Spectral Element Method (SEM) with an adaptive, nonconforming mesh is selected to discretize the transport equation. The relatively high order of the SEM lowers the fraction of wall clock time spent on inter-processor communication, which eases the load balancing task and allows us to concentrate on the memory accesses. The benchmark is designed to be three-dimensional. Parallelization and load balance issues of a reference implementation will be described in detail in future reports.
The first release of the MPI version of the LU NAS Parallel Benchmark (NPB2.0) performed poorly compared to its companion NPB2.0 codes. The later LU release (NPB2.1 & 2.2) runs up to two and a half times faster, thanks to a revised point access scheme and related communications scheme. The new scheme sends substantially fewer messages. is cache "friendly", and has a better load balance. We detail the, observations and modifications that resulted in this efficiency improvement, and show that the poor behavior of the original code resulted from deriving a message passing scheme from an algorithm originally devised for a vector architecture.
Porting applications to new high performance parallel and distributed computing platforms is a challenging task. Since writing parallel code by hand is extremely time consuming and costly, porting codes would ideally be automated by using some parallelization tools and compilers. In this paper, we compare the performance of the hand written NAB Parallel Benchmarks against three parallel versions generated with the help of tools and compilers: 1) CAPTools: an interactive computer aided parallelization too] that generates message passing code, 2) the Portland Group's HPF compiler and 3) using compiler directives with the native FORTAN77 compiler on the SGI Origin2000.